Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Can't imagine there is bigger downtown Charleston fan than you but you chose to live on James Island rather than north of Calhoun.
Development in West Ashley, James Island, Johns Island would be increasing density in the suburbs which I projected as inevitable. You have criticized suburbs as low density.
Previously you scoffed at my assertion the suburbs will become more dense than downtowns.
Do you have tourist data that shows a significant number spend time north of Calhoun?
I chose to live across the street from where I worked. I’m retired, but the convenience of where I live relative to downtown is enviable and sought after. And I have a head start to ‘Edge of America’ Folly Beach. I patronize north of Calhoun as much as I do James Island with no reticence whatsoever. It’s not the north of Calhoun you so erroneously believe it still is. Your loss.
You obviously don’t understand the infill movement, whereby strewn out suburbs become denser and eventually dense by demolishing and redesigning buildings and properties like strip shopping centers and malls to encourage more walking to amenities within the new developments. Charleston set an “urban” boundary years ago, meaning that the far reaches of suburban design within city limits were to go no farther out and infill development with urban design would be encouraged. The new way of building within the city is what is in its beginning stages now on Johns Island and outer West Ashley. Sam Rit is going to get it, too.
The suburbs as a whole will never become denser than downtown, especially not dense downtown Charleston, if they keep spreading out willy nilly on the premise that everyone wants to live out away from the city.
All I have to do is be north of Calhoun, where I once dared not tread, to see that it is renewed and heavily patronized. As for the tourism component, everything from hotels to short-term rentals to hostels have a solid presence there now.
Ups recommended, from me to you: catch “up” and open “up” your mind toward today’s Charleston.
I read an article, I believe on the Post's website, that states the Union Pier site is one of the last areas in downtown Charleston available for development. Many of the local residents have opposed high rise buildings in the development and the developer has pledged to keep it low density.
I believe you've said Charleston has space to increase the density significantly to include space for houses.
The article said there will be low income housing in the development. That surprised me.
You read that it is the last area of downtown of that size. It’s 70 acres. Duh.
No way that area should have what would qualify as high rises. The proposal that was struck down was too dense. The word “dense” scares people. What they meant was lower-built buildings for the waterfront and more green space. Bravo.
I believe you said upper King is less appealing than lower and middle King. Not saying there are no good restaurants or stores.
Can't see many people with money living downtown walking or riding bus everywhere especially residents north of Calhoun
I believe I'm more in touch with the Old Money home owners
on the peninsula. They don't want more condos, apartments and density. Messes up the historic feels they like.
Redeveloping Union Pier is example of Charleston not preserving history. They already ripped up the historic wharves for Waterfront Park. A historic seaport should have wharves.
Find where I said upper King is less appealing. It’s not where historic tours are conducted for the most part, but it appeals to people for its nightlife.
There are lots of good restaurants between Calhoun and Line streets, and several more way beyond Line. Hotel Bennett has garnered national awards. Halls Chop House is on upper King. A new four-story boutique hotel is under construction three blocks farther up King. There’s an eight-story hotel on the way just a block south of Line Street that will line the future Lowcountry Lowline, a linear park and pedestrian and bicycle thoroughfare.
Spring and Cannon streets and St. Philip Street between Spring and Line streets are transformed with new restaurants. Line Street itself from King Street to Rutledge Avenue is renewed. Popular restaurants have been drawing crowds for several years north of the Crosstown, where property values have skyrocketed.
There are so many people hailing rides on upper King Street that coincidentally in today’s Post and Courier there’s an article explaining that they now have to walk to designated pickup and drop off points so traffic isn’t blocked by ride share drivers and patrons. A CARTA shuttle is a constant.
There is an architectural review board for new proposals, including condo and apartment building proposals. They don’t want new buildings messing up the historic feel, so they work with architects to reign in unwanted effects. NIMBYs are out and YIMBYs are in nationally. It’s happening here, too.
There is zero attractiveness aesthetically to Union Pier currently other than a relic of an old building. The facade is about to be preserved. Obsolescence happens, and when something that’s ugly becomes obsolete, good riddance if they can create features that are reminiscent. I’ll take Waterfront Park and its pedestrian wharfs over what was once there.
But, after all that, North of Calhoun since it reached its renewed status has been thought of as a district for locals anyway, while south of Calhoun including South of Broad, Middle King, the Market Street area and East Bay Street have made up the traditional, historic tourist district. There is overlap all over the peninsula, though.
Status:
"dreaming of Glacier National Park"
(set 27 days ago)
757 posts, read 359,197 times
Reputation: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlestondata
The suburbs as a whole will never become denser than downtown, especially not dense downtown Charleston, if they keep spreading out willy nilly on the premise that everyone wants to live out away from the city.
The suburbs are more dense than majority of the land in the US and will become more dense as you acknowledge when you talk about infill. I don't see an advantage in more people living in close proximity. The downtown is already busy enough.
Suburban development isn't based on premise everyone wants to live away from the city. Many people do want to live away from the city for several reasons and the demand leads to the supply.
Can you give the boundaries of the city of Charleston that are used to calculate the population density? It doesn't seem that dense to me relative to the suburbs. It's surprising to me a person who emphasized density as much as you likes downtown Charleston given the building height restrictions. Seems like you would be in Manhattan or similar.
Last edited by LakeMan45; 05-01-2024 at 05:26 PM..
The suburbs are more dense than majority of the land in the US and will become more dense as you acknowledge when you talk about infill. I don't see an advantage in more people living in close proximity. The downtown is already busy enough.
Suburban development isn't based on premise everyone wants to live away from the city. Many people do want to live away from the city for several reasons and the demand leads to the supply.
Can you give the boundaries of the city of Charleston that are used to calculate the population density? It doesn't seem that dense to me relative to the suburbs. It's surprising to me a person who emphasized density as much as you likes downtown Charleston given the building height restrictions. Seems like you would be in Manhattan or similar.
You have a limited notion of what density is compared to mine. Density isn’t just people per square mile. It entails architectural design.
The more infill development we achieve, the more urban the place becomes over all. But I feel quite certain there are more people per square mile living on the peninsula than in any other part of Charleston’s “urbanized” area.
Developments like what is proposed for corridors like Sam Rit make sections of metros more urban versus suburban. An aerial view of a metro shows where the density is. I don’t call urbanized land suburban once it connects to the urban core contiguously.
I support ending all immigration. We have unemployed Americans, poverty, and major traffic issues. Many of them end up on welfare. The aesthetics of our cities and suburbs declines as we build up the roads to accommodate all these people. The third most populated country doesn't need more people. We would be benefiting from our declining birth rate if not for all the immigration.
Colleges cap enrollment because high numbers of students causes logistical issues. Nobody accuses colleges of being out to get students who can't enroll.
This tends to be the case mostly for low-skilled immigrants who come to the U.S. because of poor economic conditions and/or elevated levels of violence in their home countries (technically it's their U.S.-born children who get public benefits but you get the drift). This is typically not the case for skilled, educated immigrants who are sponsored by their employers or are in the country as university students or via specialized visa programs.
My language is in the nascent stage of being spoken, in Charleston and statewide. If they had thought the way I’ve been thinking for 40+ years, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
“‘I really think our urban growth boundary and water and sewer infrastructure really kind of dictates those sorts of things,’ she explained. ‘I think what we’re going to see more of for the town in terms of any sort of growth or development is going to be those areas of infill development.’”
Status:
"dreaming of Glacier National Park"
(set 27 days ago)
757 posts, read 359,197 times
Reputation: 265
It sounds like you want to prohibit new development in rural areas on the edge of a metro, violating private property rights. There is nothing prohibiting infill in SC cities and suburbs. That has occurred for years.
Given the US is the 3rd most populated country with a large number of immigrants coming in every year, it isn't realism based urban planning to make it harder for metros to expand.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
